One thing I found perplexing was the notion of some need to remove 'bias' toward peanut? I thought the entire point was to demonstrate frequency of different factors at play in fatalities from food anaphylaxis. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/confused.gif[/img] How is the raw data then 'biased'? Isn't the data simply clearly showing that peanut is far and away the most common culprit? Why is that 'bias?'

Also important to note (for anyone who thinks that an epipen is the answer to every dangerous situation....) that table includes a few cases in which epinephrine was administered promptly.

I also found it very sad that I was able to put names to about half of the subjects in the table. It was surprisingly upsetting to me to see them stripped of their names and listed as 'data' like that, somehow. None of them is a data point to me, I guess, knowing their stories could be mine or DD's some day.

Quote:Originally posted by Corvallis Mom:
[b]
I also found it very sad that I was able to put names to about half of the subjects in the table. It was surprisingly upsetting to me to see them stripped of their names and listed as 'data' like that, somehow. [/b]

Those same thoughts went through my mind, too.

my2girls - I'm not quite sure what your 2006 comment is refering to but I wanted to mention that there is no completely comprehensive list of fatalities - this does not detail every fatal food allergy reaction between 2001-2006. There is no such resource.